No. 4, December 2006

Cover story: More clean air per euro at sea

Main articles in brief

Cut ship emissions now! (Editorial)

Shipping's excuse that it is an international business can no longer be used to delay environmental action.

SHIP EMISSIONS
More clean air per euro at sea
Cutting ship emissions would be far more costeffective than further measures for landbased sources.

Slow progress on ship emission standards
The oil industry turns down a bold proposal for the shipping industry to switch to cleaner fuel by 2010 as impractical, warning of fuel supply uncertainties.

AIR QUALITY
Air quality agreement
EU environment ministers have agreed on a common position
regarding a new air quality directive.

CO2 EMISSIONS
Car industry fails
Fifteen of Europe´s twenty major car manufacturers have failed to improve fuel effi ciency at the rate needed to meet a key EU climate target.

CLIMATE CHANGE
The cost of inertia
Allowing greenhouse gas emissions to continue to increase may cost up to 20 per cent of global GDP, former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern concludes.

EU AND THE KYOTO PROTCOL
Heroes and zeroes in the EU Kyoto race
The EU can meet its Kyoto target. But the margin is small and success depends on a number of states doing considerably more than they promised.

CLIMATE NEGOTIATIONS
Mistrust in Nairobi
Lack of confi dence between industrialized and developing countries remains a major obstacle for progress in international climate politics.

SHIP EMISSIONS
Pilot test for sulphur offsetting
Offsetting is a quicker and cheaper way to reduce emissions
than individual sulphur limits for each vessel, ship owners and oil industry claims.

EU
Praise for Commission
Environmental NGOs welcome the action plan for energy effi ciency proposed by the EU Commission.

CHINA
Suffering from sulphur pollution

News in a brief

Recent publications

Back to top

EDITORIAL

Cut ship emissions now!

Concentrations and depositions of air pollutants are significantly influenced by emissions from international shipping. In contrast to the progress in reducing emissions from landbased sources, shipping emissions show a continuous increase.

Emissions of SO2 and NOx from international shipping in European sea areas are expected to increase by between 40 and 50 per cent by 2020. By then the emissions from international shipping around Europe will have surpassed the total from all landbased sources in the EU.

In order to meet EU environmental targets it is necessary not only to curb this increase in emissions from shipping, but also to drastically reduce them. Several studies prepared for the European Commission have demonstrated that feasible and costeffective means are available.

In its resolution of 26 September 2006 on the thematic strategy on air pollution, the European Parliament calls for the Commission to come forward with proposals:

• to establish NOx emission standards for ships using EU ports;

• to designate the Mediterranean Sea and the NorthEast Atlantic as sulphur emission control areas (SECAs);

• to lower the maximum allowed sulphur content in marine fuels used in SECAs and by passenger vessels from 1.5% to 0.5%;

• to introduce financial instruments such as taxes or charges on SO2 and NOx emissions;

• to encourage the introduction of differentiated port and fairway charges favouring vessels with low emissions of SO2 and NOx;

• to encourage the use of shore side electricity by ships when in ports;
  
• for an EU directive on the quality of marine fuels.

Regarding the first point, back in December 2003 the Council of Ministers invited the Commission to come forward with a proposal for tighter NOx standards by the end of 2006, if IMO had not put forward any proposals by then.

Reports from ongoing talks in the IMO for strengthening global fuel and emission standards indicate that progress is very slow (see article on p. 5), and that any specific proposals for new global NOx standards will not be adopted this year.

On top of legally binding emission or fuel requirements, economic instruments represent a necessary addition, because they can help to bring about both faster and greater reductions than are likely to be attainable solely through EU and IMO procedures. If economic instruments are to be properly effective, they must however also be arranged so as to further the internalizing of the environmental costs of shipping.

By demanding a number of specific measures, the European Parliament has shown the way. It is now high time for the Commission and the member states to accept their responsibility and give joint backing to the Parliament’s proposed measures.

Shipping’s character of an international business has been used as an excuse or manoeuvre to delay environmental action for too long. It is not acceptable for the shipping industry to transfer the cost of its pollution to society at large – rather, it must accept responsibility for its air emissions and substantially clean up them up.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

Back to top

SHIP EMISSIONS

More clean air per euro at sea

Cutting ship emissions would be far more costeffective than further measures for landbased sources.

BY APPLYING TECHNICAL emission control measures that are already available, emissions of sulphur and nitrogen oxides from international shipping in European sea areas could be reduced by 80 to 90 per cent. Moreover, most of these measures are much more costeffective than additional measures for further reducing emissions from landbased sources.

These are some of the conclusions of a new report1 prepared for the European Commission by a consortium of consultants, and released in October. The aim of the report is to assist activities in the EU for the implementation of the 2002 Maritime Emissions Strategy and the 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution, as well the ongoing negotiations under the International Maritime Organisation on the revision of its MARPOL Annex VI.

According to the report, the vast majority – approximately 95 per cent – of emissions from international shipping in Europe are produced by larger vessels, i.e. bigger than 500 gross registered tonnes (GRT). For these larger vessels, roughly 95 per cent of SO2 and NOx emissions are estimated to emanate from cargo ships. Nearly half of the emissions in the region originate from ships with EU flags. It is also estimated that about 20 per cent of ships’ total emissions are released within the 12-mile coastal zones, and that approximately five percent of the SO2 emissions are emitted at berth.

Ship emissions already contribute significantly to the health and environmental damage caused by air pollution in Europe. The anticipated increase in ship emissions (see box pp. 4-5) will counteract the envisaged benefits of the efforts to control emissions from landbased sources. Technologies exist however to reduce emissions from shipping beyond what is currently legally required.

80-90 per cent reduction
The study has identified a set of emission control measures that are technically available, and which could – if fully applied – reduce by 2020 the SO2 and NOx emissions from international shipping by nearly 80 and 90 per cent, respectively, compared to the baseline case.

The costs of these measures, which include the use of lowsulphur (0.5%) fuels and catalytic exhaust cleaning (SCR), are estimated at 5.5 billion euro per year in 2020. For comparison, the costs of the measures proposed by the thematic strategy for further reductions by landbased sources were estimated at 7.1 billion euro per year in 2020.

Packages of measures
Some selected specific packages of measures that could deliver emission reductions at lower costs were also explored.

• Internal engine modifications for all ships built after 2010 and retrofitting the lowspeed engines of existing (pre-2000) vessels with slide valves. Compared to the baseline case, by 2020 this would reduce NOx emissions by approximately nine per cent (which however still leaves a 33 per cent increase compared to year 2000). The costs for these measures are estimated at 26 million euro per year.
  
• The use of fuel with a maximum sulphur content of 0.5 per cent (or seawater scrubbing resulting in equivalent emissions) in the North Sea and Baltic, slide valve retrofits for existing lowspeed engines and humid air motors for all newly built vessels (post-2010). Compared to the baseline case, by 2020 this package would reduce SO2 and NOx emissions by 14 per cent and 28 per cent respectively. Compared to emission levels in 2000, emissions would increase by 23 per cent for SO2 and 7 per cent for NOx. Implementation would cost some 773 million euro per year.

Far lower marginal cost
A comparison of the emission reduction options for ships with those outlined in the Thematic Strategy for landbased stationary sources, shows that the technical measures for marine sources could yield reductions of approximately three times as much SO2 and seven times as much NOx as have been proposed for landbased sources. For SO2, approximately 80 per cent of this potential can be achieved at marginal costs that are less than 15 per cent of the highest marginal costs for the measures proposed for landbased sources. For NOx, the lowcost potential represents about 70 per cent of the technical potential considered in the study.

The costeffectiveness of measures for ships relative to landbased measures cannot be judged from marginal abatement costs only, ut also need to consider the damage to health and the environment caused by emissions, i.e. it also has to take into account atmospheric dispersion characteristics.

For this study this is being done by using the RAINS integrated
assessment model, which brings together information on abatement costs and atmospheric dispersion characteristics, thus enabling comprehensive costeffectiveness analyses to be undertaken. Such analysis is currently being performed for the ongoing revision of the national emission ceilings (NEC) directive. (A proposal for a revised NEC directive is expected by mid-2007.)

Full assessment to come
A full assessment of the costeffectiveness of ship emission controls was not finalized in time for this interim report, but there are plans to perform such analyses in the context of the NEC directive evision process, using the information generated in this study.

However, the current report contains an “initial and incomplete” comparison of the health and environmental impacts of the various ship mission control scenarios investigated. Based on this comparison, it is concluded that measures aimed at reducing ship emissions will be an essential element of a leastcost strategy.

According to the report, a more detailed analysis of the cost-effectiveness of measures for specific sea regions, distinguishing contributions within and outside the 12mile zones, and considering differences between cargo ships and passenger ferries is likely to identify even larger benefits from targeted emission control strategies. Such an analysis is planned for the forthcoming policy scenarios in the context of the revision of the NEC directive and which will be reported in the first half of 2007.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

1 Analysis of Policy Measures to Reduce Ship Emissions in the Context of the Revision of the National Emissions Ceilings Directive (Interim report, October 2006). Consultancy report to the European Commission’s DG Environment by the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, Entec UK Limited and the Norwegian Meteorological Institute. The report is available Here>

Shipping emissions increasingly important Baseline scenario for emissions of NOx (in kilotonnes) up to 2020 from landbased sources in EU25 and from international shipping in European sea areas. Source: IIASA 2006. MARITIME ACTIVITIES are already responsible for a significant fraction of emissions of air pollutants in Europe. It is estimated for the year 2000 that SO2 and NOx emissions from international shipping in European sea areas amounted to approximately 25–30 per cent of the landbased emissions in the EU25. Landbased emissions in the EU are expected to decline in coming years. The baseline projections prepared for the ongoing revision of the National Emission Ceilings (NEC) directive indicates that by 2020, current EU legislation for landbased sources would lead to a reduction of SO2 emissions of between 56 and 67 per cent, and of NOx emissions by between 45 and 50 per cent, compared to the year 2000. Based on an analysis of the costs and benefi ts of further measures, the European Commission proposed in September 2005 in its Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution more stringent environmental objectives that imply the need for more farreaching reductions of about 82 per cent for SO2 and 60 per cent for NOx, by 2020. There are also some measures in force to address emissions from international shipping, such as the 1997 MARPOL Annex VI of the International Maritime Organisation and the 2005 EU directive on the sulphur content of marine fuels. But these are clearly inadequate, and the expected increase in the volume of ship movements will far outweigh the limited positive environmental effects of these measures. Baseline scenario for emissions of SO2 (in kilotonnes) up to 2020 from landbased sources in EU25 and from international shipping in European sea areas. Source: IIASA 2006. Consequently, under businessasusual assumptions, SO2 emissions from international shipping in European waters are projected to increase by 42 per cent between 2000 and 2020, NOx emissions by 47 per cent and PM2.5 emissions by 56 per cent. Without additional measures, by 2020 the emissions from international shipping would then come close to the projected baseline emission levels for landbased sources, and even surpass the target levels established in the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution for landbased sources, in particular for SO2 by a factor of two (see graphs). CHRISTER ÅGREN

Back to top


SHIP EMISSIONS

New global pollution standards debated

The oil industry turns down a bold proposal for the shipping industry to switch to cleaner fuel by 2010 as impractical, warning of fuel supply uncertainties.

IN MID OCTOBER, the industry group Intertanko made a bold proposal for all ships to switch from conventional heavy fuel oil to lighter distillate fuel oil by 2010, and at the same time establish a global sulphur cap for marine fuels of 1.0 per cent, which should later be strengthened to 0.5 per cent for new ships (see box below).

This and other proposals to reduce shipemissions of air pollutants were debated at an intersessional meeting of a subcommittee to the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), held in Oslo, Norway on 13-17 November. Pursuant to an MEPC decision in 2005, IMO is presently considering revisions to the international standards on emissions from ships of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) and also considering the regulation of PM emissions for the first time.

Oil industry negative
Commenting on the Intertanko proposal, the secretary-general of the IMO, Mr. Mitropoulos said that it “may be as significant a change as when ships first changed from coal to oil”. Several countries, as well as environmentalist groups, expressed interest and general support for the proposal. The oil industry, however, was clearly negative, claiming that such a change was impractical in the given timeframe, and some countries were also sceptical.

To put the Intertanko proposal into perspective, the current global cap is 4.5 per cent, although in practice the average sulphur content of marine fuels is about 2.7 per cent. In Europe the sulphur content is already limited to maximum of 1.5 per cent in one of the two special protection areas (SECAs), namely the Baltic Sea. The same limit will also apply to the North Sea (including the English Channel) from autumn 2007.

Not surprisingly, the discussion on options to reduce SO2 emissions was largely dominated by reactions to Intertanko’s proposal. The proposal would produce substantial environmental benefits. Not only would the use of reducedsulphur distillate fuel reduce emissions of SO2 and PM significantly, it would also allow the more effective use of advanced emission control devices, such as selective catalytic reduction to reduce NOx.

Focus on supply uncertainty
While the Intertanko proposal would result in higher fuel costs
Continued on following page for ship owners, the opposition, including the oil industry, focused primarily on the fuel supply uncertainties. However, some pointed out that the refining industry would most likely move toward producing increased volumes of distillate fuels anyway, and that the Intertanko proposal would simply speed up that inevitable process.

Focus on basic options
In the end, the group agreed to focus the future debate on SO2-related measures on a few basic options. One would be to keep the current structure of regulation, but lower the sulphur limit in SECAs, first from 1.5 to 1.0 per cent (possible target year 2010), and later to 0.5 per cent (possible target year 2015). A variant of this option would be to reduce the global sulphur cap as well.

An alternative would be to follow the proposal by Intertanko (see Box). A significant variant of this would be to allow the use of residual fuel meeting the same sulphur limits, or alternative methods (such as flue gas scrubbing) to meet equivalent sulphur limits.

New engine standards for NOx
Regarding NOx, a consensus appears to be emerging that favours a twostage approach to new engine standards, with initial standards to be effective around 2010, and a second set around 201415. Most delegations supported a first stage for new ships limited to inengine modifications, producing reductions of 1020 per cent, as compared to current new engine standards. Secondstage reductions would most likely involve flue gas treatment, but there was no consensus on reduction targets.

There was some discussion about geographically defined NOx standards, either along the lines of SECAs (which must be nominated by shore states and approved), or a coastal zone predefined at a fixed distance from shore. No significant progress was made regarding NOx reductions from existing ships.

No progress on PM reduction
Although there appears to be general agreement that the best current option for reducing PM emissions is to reduce sulphur limits in the fuel, the discussion on PM reductions really didn’t progress very far, probably because some people still perceive there to be a need for better information on the characteristics and transport of PM emissions from ships.

The benefits of the Intertanko proposal on PM emissions were noted, in that both lower sulphur levels and cleaner distillate fuel will result in significantly lower PM emissions as compared to highsulphur residual heavy fuel oil. Seawater scrubbing continues to be pushed by some industry groups, and the meeting agreed to a UK proposal to allow states the option of conducting trials with economic instruments (including emissions trading) within their national sea areas.

NGOs advocate fuel switch
A coalition of European and American international environmentalist organizations, formally represented at the IMO by Friends of the Earth International, attended the meeting and pressured the shipping industry to promptly switch to cleaner fuels and put air pollution controls on both new and existing ship engines.

Environmentalists want intermediate reductions
Based on the emission reduction potential of current technology and cleaner fuel supplies, the environmentalists urged the IMO to require intermediate reductions of 40-50 per cent in SO2 and NOx by 2010, and 70-90 per cent reductions in these emissions by 2015.

At the end of the meeting, participants were urged to submit specific proposals for consideration at the next subcommittee meeting, which is scheduled for April 2007. Here, the aim is to agree on recommendations that are as specific as possible, and submit these to the full MEPC, which will meet in July 2007. MEPC will then consider the new draft standards for approval.

CHRISTER ÅGREN
DAVID MARSHALL

Back to top

NEW AIR QUALITY DIRECTIVE

Ministers agree compromise text

ON 23 OCTOBER, EU environment ministers reached agreement on a common position regarding the proposed new directive on air quality. The ministers essentially confirmed the socalled general approach reached by the Council on 27 June 2006.

In line with the Commission’s proposal, the ministers argued that more so-called flexibility should be given to the member states. This means that where member states can demonstrate that they have taken all reasonable measures to implement the legislation but still need more time to comply with air quality standards in certain places, it is proposed that they be allowed to request a time-limited extension to the compliance deadline in the affected zone.

Key elements
Among the key elements included in the agreement are:

• A non-binding target value for PM2.5 in 2010 of 25 micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3) to be replaced by a binding limit value in 2015, also of 25µg/m3;
  
  
• The possibility for member states to postpone attainment of the limit values for PM10 until three years after entry into force of the directive. (Note that these limit values are according to current legislation legally binding as from 2005.);
  
  
• The possibility for member states to postpone the deadlines for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and benzene by a maximum of five years, until 1 January 2015;
  
  
• The principle that limit values should apply everywhere, butin certain locations compliance with limit values should not be assessed.

Consequently, the ministers did not accept Parliament’s proposal for longer time extensions up to 2014, or for weakening the daily limit value for PM10. Nor did they agree to Parliament’s proposals to strengthen some of the PM limit values, i.e. an annual PM2.5 limit value of 20 µg/m3 as from 2015, and an annual PM10 limit value of 33 µg/m3 as from 2010. (See AN 3/06, pp. 6–8.)

Ambition level too low
Environment commissioner Stavros Dimas welcomed the agreement, and said “The scourge of air pollution is still shortening European citizens’ lives by an average of eight months. The Council’s text endorses the approach and the level of ambition of the Commission’s proposal for tackling this challenge.”

Air pollution campaigner Kerstin Meyer of the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) concluded that the council’s ambition level on PM2.5 was still too low. According to environmentalists and health groups, limit values for PM2.5 should be tightened further to match the air quality guidelines recently adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO).

After legal and linguistic checks the council agreement text will be confirmed as a common position and returned to parliament for a second reading, probably in the first half of 2007.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

Back to top

CO2 EMISSIONS

Car industry fails to meet climate target

Achievements of European carmakers by 2005 in relation to what is needed to be on track to meet their carbon dioxide emission reduction target by 2008.

THREE-QUARTERS OF the twenty major car manufacturers operating in Europe have failed to improve fuel efficiency at the rate needed to meet a key EU climate target, according to a new study published by the European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E).
Improving the fuel efficiency of new cars is a key method of tackling climate change because the more fuel a car uses, the more of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted into the atmosphere.

Using sales data between 1997 and 2005, the study has compared manufacturers’ achievements at the end of the period with what they were expected to have achieved in order to be on track towards the target. The results show that three-quarters of carmakers are failing to cut emissions fast enough.

Nissan is the worst performer in Europe followed by Suzuki, Mazda. Audi, Volvo, BMW and Volkswagen. These seven brands all cut emissions at less than half the rate needed to meet their commitment. Toyota, maker of the low-emission Prius hybrid, is also failing to improve efficiency across its range at the rate needed.
Fiat is the best performer in Europe, followed by Citroen, Renault, Ford and Peugeot. All five are on track to meet or exceed the target by 2008.

The findings will increase the pressure on the European Commission to come forward with a legally binding EU target on CO2 emissions from cars. “Clearly the target is achievable, but as long as 75 per cent of car makers go unpunished for their failure, we will never
make the necessary progress,” said Aat Peterse of T&E. “Europe must kiss its voluntary targets goodbye and waste no more time in coming up with legallybinding measures to double fuel efficiency in the next decade. Individual carmakers must be held responsible and punished if they fail.”

The study concludes that if climate targets are to be met, companies must improve efficiency across their entire range. One or two very efficient models that sell in limited numbers are not enough.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

The report “How clean is your car brand?” is available online at: www.transportenvironment.org/docs/Publications /2006/2006-10_how_clean_is_your_car_brand.pdf

Back to top

CLIMATE CHANGE

Cost of inaction will be enormous

Allowing greenhouse gas emissions to continue to increase may cost up to 20 per cent of global GDP, former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern concludes.

THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE review ever carried out on the economics of climate change, the Stern report, estimates that if greenhouse gas emissions continue increasing at their present rate, the cost could be 5–20 per cent of GDP per year.

Published on 30 October, the review was commissioned by the UK government and carried out by a team of economists led by former World Bank chief economist Sir Nicholas Stern.

Optimistic conclusion
“The conclusion of the review is essentially optimistic,” said Sir Nicholas Stern. “There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if we act now and act internationally. But the task is urgent. Delaying action, even by a decade or two, will take us into dangerous territory.”

The first half of the review focuses on the impacts and risks arising from uncontrolled climate change, and on the costs and opportunities associated with action to tackle it. The second half examines the national and international policy challenges of moving to a lowcarbon global economy.

Early action beneficial
The team used a number of different techniques to assess costs and risks of climate change, and the evidence gathered led to the simple conclusion that the benefits of strong and early action far outweigh the economic costs of not acting.

Based on results from economic models, it is estimated that if no action is taken, the overall costs and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least five per cent of global GDP each year, now and forever. If a wider range of risks and impacts is taken into account, the estimates of damage could rise to 20 per cent of GDP or more.

In contrast, the costs of action – reducing greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the worst impacts of climate change – can be limited to around one per cent of global GDP each year.

Down to our generation
Commenting on the Stern report Charlie Kronick of Greenpeace UK said:

“This report says it’s down to our generation to defeat climate change or the costs we pass on to our children will be unbearable. We need to spend one per cent of GDP on climate change. That’s the same amount of money we spend on global advertising. Surely saving the planet is more important than billboards and TV adverts.”

The report concludes that greenhouse gas concentrations should be limited to somewhere in the range 450–550 parts per million (ppm). Anything higher would substantially increase the risks of very harmful impacts, while only marginally reducing the costs of emission cuts.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

The report “Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change” can be downloaded at: www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/Independent_Reviews/ stern_review_economics_climate_change/ stern-review_index.cfm

Back to top


EU AND THE KYOTO PROTCOL

Domestic measures not enough to reach target

Present measures and policies will only reduce EU greenhouse gas emissions by less than one per cent, while the Kyoto protocol demands eight per cent reduction by 2012.

THE EU CAN MEET its undertakings under the Kyoto Protocol. But the margin is small and success depends on a number of states doing considerably more than they promised.

The new EU member states are all on course to meet their undertakings to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. For the 15 original member states the picture is not so rosy. The measures agreed so far by the EU15 are totally inadequate to reduce emissions by the promised eight per cent by 2012. Without further measures, emissions will fall by only 0.6 per cent. This is the conclusion of a recent report from the European Environment Agency (EEA). 1

EU15 emissions rises
Over the last five years emissions of greenhouse gases have risen in the EU15. In 2004 emissions reached the highest level since 1996. Nevertheless, according to the EEA it is still possible for the EU15 to fulfil its commitment under the Kyoto Protocol – but only just. It is not sufficient that a string of additional measures are being taken to limit emissions. Several member states report that they intend to take advantage of the Kyoto Protocol’s flexible mechanisms, which allow them to offset emissions by supporting projects in developing countries. A few also intend to use carbon sinks.

Despite this, according to the EEA the EU will only meet its Kyoto targets if a few member states reduce their emissions considerably more than they are required to, and hence compensate for the failure of the others.

Heroes and zeroes
The figures from the EEA report clearly identify the heroes and zeroes on the European climate stage. Spain has a lead role among the latter. Under the EU’s burden-sharing agreement the country is entitled to increase its emissions by 15 per cent, but will widely overshoot this mark. According to EEA forecasts it will exceed this target by around 25 per cent. Other states that are failing to meet their climate targets, despite being allowed to increase emissions over 1990 levels, are Portugal and Ireland. One of the main heroes is the UK, which will meet its tough target (-12 per cent) with more than a 10-percent margin. The UK and Sweden are the only EU15 states that consider the measures they have taken are sufficient to achieve the target.

Additional measures, Kyoto mechanisms and a limited use of carbon sinks will be required to reach the EU Kyoto target of eight per cent emission reduction, the European Environmental Agency concludes.

Total emissions by the new EU member states (EU10) in 2004 were 23 per cent lower than 1990 levels, and they will meet their Kyoto targets by a broad margin. (Malta and Cyprus have no Kyoto targets.) The trend among the EU10 is, according to the EEA, mainly a consequence of economic and structural changes in these countries following the transition to a market economy, which has resulted in the disappearance of ageing, energyintensive and highly polluting industry.

Kyoto mechanisms
Eight member states have reached a decision to use the Kyoto Protocol’s flexible mechanisms and earmarked funds from their state budgets for this purpose: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Netherlands and Spain.

A further four states have confirmed that they intend to use flexible mechanisms, but have not yet set aside funds: France, Luxembourg, Portugal and Slovenia. Slovenia is alone among the new Member States in wanting to use this option. Germany and the UK project they will achieve their targets without using Kyoto mechanisms.

Transport sector tailing behind
The emissions trend in the various sectors of society demonstrates a familiar pattern. Most sectors have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions. These include energy production, industry, agriculture and waste management. The exception is the transport sector, with a rise of over 25 per cent in emissions between 1990 and 2004.

The EEA forecasts that emissions from energy production, agriculture and waste management will continue to fall as a result of measures already taken and planned. In the best case, emissions from industry and the transport sector may be stabilized at current levels. Without further measures, emissions from the transport sector in 2012 will be 35 per cent higher than in 1990.

A greenhouse gas emissions map of Europe 2005. The colour of each country indicates whether it will reach its Kyoto target or not. The circles indicated projected shortfall or overdelivery relative to target. Among EU member states, Malta and Cyprus do not have any reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol. (Enlarge the Map )

The explanation for the trend in the transport sector is primarily that improvements in the environmental performance of individual vehicles are overwhelmed by the growing number of vehicles and increased volume of transport. Average carbon dioxide emissions from individual cars fell by 12 per cent between 1995 and 2004, but the number of vehicles rose by 21 per cent over the same period.
The EEA also points out that EU carbon dioxide emissions from international aviation and navigation – not addressed under the Kyoto Protocol – increased by 59 percent between 1990 and 2004.

ROGER OLSSON

1 EEA Report no. 9 /2006: Greenhouse gas emission trends and projections in Europe 2006. Available at http://reports.eea.europa. eu/eea_report_2006_9/en

Back to top


CLIMATE NEGOTIATIONS

Still hope despite slow progress

THE CLIMATE CONFERENCE in Nairobi this November reached an agreement on how to move towards negotiations for a “son of Kyoto” protocol. However, it is rather vague and it came at a cost. China and other developing countries were assured that they would remain exempt from mandatory emission cuts in the near future, despite the fact that carbon dioxide emissions are skyrocketing in China, India and Brazil. China is expected to overtake the US as the top carbon dioxide emitter in the world by 2010, according to the International Energy Agency.

No dispute on science
One positive achievement at the Nairobi meeting was that, for the first time at an international conference on climate politics, the scientific evidence for the causes of climate change was not disputed. Still, the position of China and other rapidly developing poor countries and the continued US rejection of the Kyoto pact made it one of the least productive of these meetings since the Kyoto Protocol was agreed in 1997. Even if the Nairobi conference was not expected to deal with major issues, setting a deadline for reviewing past progress and negotiating a new agreement was considered vital. However, all that could be agreed was to postpone further discussions on this matter until 2008. On the other hand, some progress was made in the debate on the Climate Convention and in the adhoc working group on future commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, where a working plan for a post-Kyoto agreement was outlined.

Fear of gap in 2012
“If a new agreement is to be in place when the Kyoto Protocol expires by the end of 2012, negotiations must be finished no later than 2009. The progress made in Nairobi means there is still hope that this will be possible,” says Reinhold Pape of the Swedish NGO Secretariat on Acid Rain.

It is not only NGOs that fear the consequences of a situation in which the Kyoto protocol expires without a new agreement in place. “If we have a gap in 2012 we would have a very serious problem,” the UK Secretary of Environment David Miliband said in an interview with The Independent. “The whole system would be in tatters.”

EU must take first step
According to European NGOs, industrialized countries should make binding commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by at least 30 per cent by 2020 and by at least 50 percent by 2050. A first step in this direction and a crucial signal to developing countries would be an EU decision on a 30-percent target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, to be taken during Germany’s presidency in the coming spring. “Developing countries will not move ahead unless they see that the industrialized world is willing to take on new, binding targets beyond Kyoto,” Reinhold Pape says.

The Nairobi meeting demonstrated, once again, that the lack of confidence between industrialized and developing countries is a major obstacle for progress and agreements in international climate politics. “The gap between the science and the politics remains large, with industrialized and developing countries divided by priorities and divided among themselves,” David Miliband concluded.

Increasing emissions
The refusal of the US to join the Kyoto process is of course one of the main reasons for the stalemate. Current emission trends is another, giving the developing world little reason to believe that industrialized countries are committed to substantial emission cuts. Since 1990, emissions of carbon dioxide in the United States have grown by 16 per cent. In Canada and Australia the increase has been 30 per cent, and even in the EU emissions have increased over the last few years.

On top of this, progress has been very limited in two areas covered by the Kyoto Protocol and of great importance to the developing world: technology transfer and the Adaptation Fund. At the Nairobi meeting, China complained that rich countries have not moved quickly enough to supply new technologies to help poor countries curb emissions.

Adaptation fund delayed
The Adaptation Fund is intended to provide economic resources for developing countries to mitigate the effects of climate change. There was hope that the Nairobi meeting would focus on this issue and take a substantial step forward, especially since this was the first meeting of the parties to the UN Climate Convention held in Africa, the continent that will be most severely affected by global warming. However, the meeting only succeeded in agreeing on some principles for the fund, meaning further delay until it can be in operation.

Jan Kowalzig, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe, commented: “The Adaptation Fund may raise at most 300 million euro between 2008 and 2012, while the World Bank predicts that the most vulnerable developing countries would actually need one hundred times this amount, annually.”

“The conference has let Africa and the rest of the developing world down,” said Antonio Hill, an Oxfam policy adviser. “It has put forward only vague promises to help the world’s poorest countries adapt to climate change.”

ROGER OLSSON

Back to top


SHIP EMISSIONS

Pilot test for sulphur offsetting

Offsetting is a quicker and cheaper way to reduce emissions
than individual sulphur limits for each vessel, ship owners and oil industry claims.

THE CROSS-INDUSTRY GROUP of ship owners and oil companies, SEAaT, has over the last year performed a pilot exercise1 to investigate the potential for “offsetting” sulphur emissions from ships in the North Sea. Offsetting is in this context defined as a simple way of balancing that allows some ships to exceed emission limits while others perform better than the limit – thus allowing a consortium of ships to jointly, as an average for the whole group of ships, achieve the regulatory limit set for individual ships.

In total, 58 ships from seven companies participated in the pilot project and regularly reported on operational data, such as fuel consumption and position when inside the North Sea sulphur emission control area (SECA). At the outset, each operator chose whether they would use marine gasoil with a maximum sulphur content of 0.2%, emission abatement equipment (seawater scrubber with an assumed sulphur abatement efficiency of 93%), or heavy fuel oil with the same sulphur content as in present operations (ranging from 1.1% to 3.3%).

It should be noted that the sulphur abatement options were applied only in theory, not in practice. According to SEAaT, the figure on assumed abatement efficiency of seawater scrubbing is based on recent operational test results from practical application of this technology onboard a ship.

23 per cent better performance
At the end of the test, which lasted from April 2005 to March 2006, an excess of emission credits had been generated, and the overall result was that the pilot fleet had an estimated 23 per cent better environmental performance than required under the SECA regulation. The SECA requirement, which enters into force for the North Sea next autumn, is a maximum fuel sulphur limit of 1.5%, while the pilot fleet theoretically achieved a level equivalent to 1.2%.

Significantly cheaper
According to the report, the pilot exercise demonstrated that compliance through offsetting can be significantly cheaper than if all vessels were to individually meet the 1.5% fuel sulphur limit. This conclusion is based on calculations showing that if the premium price for 1.5% fuel were US$50/tonne, the overall theoretical cost saving for the fleet of 58 ships would be nearly US$10 million, or close to 10 per cent lower than if all ships were to use 1.5% sulphur fuel. At a price premium of about US$33/tonne fuel or less, there would be no cost savings.

In order to compare the costs of low-sulphur fuel and seawater scrubbing, in this study the latter has been calculated based on spreading the total costs over five years of fuel consumption, resulting in a range of additional costs between US$35 and 72/tonne of fuel. This could also be compared to the price premium for marine gas oil containing less than 0.2% sulphur, which is said to be about US$250/tonne.

Avoiding hotspots
Based on the assumptions made in the study regarding the costs and abatement efficiency of seawater scrubbing, it is concluded that in an offsetting regime, this technology would become economically attractive if the so-called “effective cost per tonne of fuel” were less than twice that of the 1.5% low-sulphur fuel premium. Without offsetting, scrubbing is only attractive if the effective cost per tonne is simply less than the low-sulphur fuel premium.

No effort was made in this project to avoid the possible formation of emission “hotspots”, but it is stated that a fully operational scheme would have to be designed for a geographical balance of emission credit generators and purchasers to avoid pollution hotspots and protect sensitive areas.

Higher monitoring standards
It is pointed out that apart from potential cost savings, an offsetting trading scheme could also provide higher standards of monitoring and enforcement, although no estimates have been made as to the extra costs of managing and supervising such a scheme.

Cor Nobel, secretary general of SEAaT, says that offsetting is a better way to reduce emissions quickly because it provides an economic incentive that can drive emission abatement technologies as well the use of reduced sulphur fuels. Consequently, SEAaT believes the EU and IMO should introduce flexibility in their fuel sulphur limits to enable such schemes to operate.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

1 Sulphur Emissions Offsetting Pilot (August 2006). Prepared by BMT Ltd for SEAaT (Shipping Emissions Abatement and Trading), an industry group of shipping and oil companies formed in 2002. More information about SEAaT, as well as the report, can be found at: http://www.seaat.org/

Back to top


EU

Energy efficiency plan unveiled

IN OCTOBER THE COMMISSION presented its Action Plan for Energy Efficiency, which contains a package of more than 75 measures covering a wide range of costeffective energy efficiency initiatives. The action plan is to be implemented over the next six years.

According to the Commission, a potential energy saving of 20 per cent by 2020 is technically and economically feasible. The realization of such a reduction in energy use could by 2020 lead to annual savings of 100 billion euro and 390 million tonne oil equivalents (Mtoe), whilst reducing the EU’s CO2 emissions more than twice as much as required by the Kyoto Protocol by 2012.

Ten priority actions
The plan contains ten priority actions, including:

• Minimum energy efficiency standards are to be developed under the energy-using products directive. The standards could be implemented as binding legislative targets or voluntary industry agreements. There will also be an upgrade of existing appliance energy-labelling schemes.
  
  
• Minimum binding efficiency requirements for new electricity, heating and cooling installations rated at less than 20 megawatts will be developed, and similar requirements for larger installations may also be developed.
  
  
• Possible proposal for legislation to ensure the EU meets its target level for average new vehicle emissions of 120 grams per kilometre by 2012.
  
  
• Review of the EU energy tax directive to take place in 2008, with the aim to facilitate a more targeted and coherent use of energy taxation. Possible use of tax credits as incentives for firms to produce and consumers to choose products that are more energy efficient.

Praise from NGOs
In a joint statement, three environmentalist groups – Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and WWF – applauded the energy efficiency target proposed by the Commission, i.e. to reduce total EU energy consumption by at least 20 per cent by 2020. However, they also warned that the action plan falls short of proposing legislation that is required to meet the target.

“The Commission’s target to reduce energy wastage is welcome, but education programmes and voluntary measures are not going to cut it alone. If the EU is serious about becoming the most energy-efficient region in the world, the 20-percent target must be put at the heart of all policy areas,” said Mahi Sideridou of Greenpeace.

On 23 November the Council of EU Energy Ministers welcomed the Commission’s action plan on energy efficiency. It concluded that energy efficiency and energy savings contribute to the main policy objectives of Europe’s energy policy as regards security of energy supply, competitiveness and sustainable development, including climate change.

Also on 23 November, the European Parliament’s Industry and Energy Committee stated it wants the EU to be the most energyefficient economy in the world by 2020.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

The action plan (Com 2006 645) and other related documents from the Commission can be downloaded from: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/ action_plan_energy_efficiency/index_en.htm.

WWF, together with a number of partner organizations, has recently launched a web portal to help consumers .nd the most energyefficient appliances and cars in Europe: http://www.topten.info

Back to top


CHINA

Suffering from sulphur pollution

TOTAL EMISSIONS of sulphur dioxide in China reached 25.5 million tonnes in 2005, an increase of 27 per cent over levels in the year 2000, according to a recent report by the country’s State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA).

The increased use of coal as an energy source has been cited as the number one contributor to the increase in sulphur dioxide (SO2)
emissions. Coal accounts for approximately 70 per cent of China’s energy consumption.

China has set a goal of cutting pollution output by ten per cent, adjusted for economic growth, over the next five years. In the latest assessment, SEPA announced that nationwide emissions
of SO2 grew to 12.7 million tonnes in the first six months – up 4.2 percent on the same period last year.

Bathing in acid rain
The government plans to cap SO2 emissions at 23 million tonnes by 2010, according to its 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-2010), which maps out social and economic development over the next five years. According to Li Xinmin, deputy director general of SEPA’s Department of Pollution Control, this is a compulsory target. SEPA has signed a set of documents with China’s six largest electricity power companies, which will result in them reducing their emissions to set levels. Coalfired power plants alone emit some 16 million tonnes of SO2 - more than 60 per cent of the total.

With Chinese factories discharging more and more SO2, one third of China's territory was bathed in acid rain last year, according to a parliamentary report. It showed that more than half the 696 Chinese cities and counties monitored had experienced acid rain. In some regions, every rainy day was an acid rain day, according to the pollution control inspection report released by the country's top legislature in August and submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress.

Every second city polluted
Moreover, in October SEPA reported that air quality in nearly half of China's cities was moderately or seriously polluted. In cities with a population exceeding one million people, sulphur dioxide and particulate matter are the top pollutants.

SEPA has estimated that each tonne of SO2 emissions may cause approximately 20,000 yen (about US$2,500) of economic damage. Thus, the 25.5 million tonnes of total SO2 emissions in 2005 would have caused economic losses of more than 500 billion yen ($63 billion) to the Chinese economy.

CHRISTER ÅGREN

Sources: Xinhua News Agency (www.xinhuanet.com/english/)

Back to top

News in a brief

Tax breaks for diesel filters in Germany
On 29 November the German cabinet finally agreed tax incentives for particle filters on existing as well as new diesel cars. The law will enter force in April 2007 and will provide a tax reduction of 330 euros. It applies to diesel cars equipped with particle filter as from 1 January 2006 up to 31 December 2009. Non-equipped vehicles will pay around 20 euros extra. Filters must cut emissions to 5 mg/km, the planned EU legal standard for new cars from around 2008.

Source: Press release from the German environment ministry, 30 November 2006.

Dimas getting tough on Naps
The European Commission has demanded that member states set much tougher caps on carbon emissions in their national allocation plans (Naps) for the second phase of the EU’s emission trading scheme. In decisions taken on ten plans on 29 November the commission called for an average cut in emissions of seven per cent compared to draft Naps submitted by governments. The decisions concern Naps from Germany, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom. These represent 42 per cent of allowances distributed in the first phase. All except the UK have been told to cut their allocation to firms. Five have been told to make cuts of at least 25 per cent.

Source: ENDS Europe Daily, 29 November 2006

Industry wants stricter NOx limits
Stricter limits on emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from diesel cars can and should be introduced far more quickly, according to Yara International, a company that makes air pollution mitigation products. The effect of current legislative proposals, concludes Yara, would be that European car manufacturers, for the next eight years at least, are forced to export cleaner cars to the US and Japan than will be made available on the European market.

Source: ENDS Europe Daily, 20 October 2006

Back to top

Recent publications

Annual European Community LRTAP Convention Emission Inventory 1990–2004 (2006)
Report presenting European Community air pollution data for the years 1990–2004. The report provides an overview of emission trends and data availability for the EU25. EEA Technical report No 8/2006.
Can be downloaded from: reports.eea.europa.eu/ technical_report_2006_8/en

Marine emissions reduction options (2006)
Focussing on the Hong Kong and the Pearl River Delta Region, the report looks at current emissions and their effects, and various options for reducing them. Published by Civic Exchange, an independent Hong Kong-based public policy think tank. 44 pp.
Can be downloaded from: www.civic-exchange.org/publications/2006/ marineemissione.pdf

Twelve virtuous examples: Measures to improve air quality and reduce particles (2006)
Four-page leaflet from the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) providing details on twelve examples of good measures to reduce air pollution. Copies of the leaflet can be ordered from the EEB, contact: press-stagiaire@eeb.org, or downloaded from the EEB website: www.eeb.org/activities/air/documents/Measures_to_improve_AQ.pdf

Sustainable mobility for all! How to refl ect the needs of special groups in local policies to encourage sustainable mobility
Brochure aimed at supporting local authorities all over Europe in coping with the challenge of adapting their transportation networks to the demands of all users and implementing land use policies to facilitate sustainable mobility. 47 pp. Can be downloaded from www.smile-europe.org/

Towards sustainable urban transport policies: Recommendations for local authorities
Sustainable mobility aims to reconcile citizens’ mobility needs with quality of life and the environment. The SMILE project aims to help local authorities cope with this challenge by presenting good practices and introducing innovative approaches. 68 pp. Can be downloaded from www.smile-europe.org/

Clearing the air: The myth and reality of aviation and climate change (2006)
The report provides an analysis of the current state of aviation’s contribution to global warming, gives an overview of the impact of aviation on climate change, and investigates some of the policy options to combat the impact of air transport on the global climate. Published jointly by the European Federation for Transport and Environment and Climate Action Network Europe. 47 pp. Can be downloaded at: www.transportenvironment. org/Topic7.html

Heavy metal emissions, depositions, critical loads and exceedances in Europe (2006)
Analysis of emission scenarios up to 2020 for cadmium, lead, mercury, and six other metals, as well as estimates of deposition levels and resulting exceedances of critical loads. Published by the Dutch Ministry of Environment. 93 pp. For more information contact j.p.hettelingh@mnp.nl

A Price Worth Paying (2006)
Report by the European Federation for Transport and Environment providing a guide to the new “Eurovignette” directive that governs road tolls for lorries. Contains a summary of the opportunities opened up by the new rules, and a detailed explanation of the directive. 58 pp. Can be downloaded at www.transportenvironment.org/Topic15.html

Critical loads for copper, nickel, zinc, arsenic, chromium and selenium for terrestrial ecosystems at the European scale (2006)
Provides a preliminary assessment of critical loads for forest soils and agricultural soils, as well as maps showing the geographical distribution in Europe for each metal and effect separately. Report commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Environment and prepared by the Dutch consultancy Alterra. 45 pp. Alterra report 1355. Can be downloaded at: www2.alterra.wur.nl/Webdocs/ PDFFiles/Alterrarapporten/Alterra Rapport1355.pdf

Drowning in Process? The Implementation of the EU’s 6th Environmental Action Programme (2006)
This study evaluates the implementation of the 6EAP. The key findings are summarized in four tables, providing an assessment of whether the main objectives have been achieved, whether there has been progress towards their achievement or no significant progress at all. The report was prepared for the European Environmental Bureau by the Institute for European Environmental Policy. 75 pp. Can be downloaded from www.eeb.org

Workshop on the importance of non-technical measures for reductions in air pollutants and how to consider them in integrated assessment modelling (2006)
Report from a workshop held in December 2005 on non-technical measures for emission abatement, organized by the Swedish ASTA programme in collaboration with the Task Force on Integrated Assessment of the LRTAP Convention. Published by the Swedish Environmental Research Institute. 71 pp. Can be downloaded from: http://asta.ivl.se

Back to top

Air Pollution & Climate Secretariat, Box 7005, SE-402 31 Göteborg, Sweden.
Phone. +46-31-711 45 15, Fax +46-31-711 46 20, info@airclim.org

References to Taiwan on this website refer to Taiwan, China and are in accordance with practice adopted by the IMO.